The guru of web usability

"He's also the man that some web designers love to hate. In particular, they love to heap abuse on his website - UseIt.com."

Here's a Guardian interview with the guru himself, Jakob Nielsen.

But first, a digression.

I like lists. So much that I have lists upon lists. Lists for everything. Lists of life goals, lists of tasks...really long lists of tasks. Then, people send me lists via email (usually more tasks). Those lists get added to my other lists. Then I have Outlook making lists for me everytime I flag something. So I have paper and Outlook lists. Then I go home and I have sheaves and sheaves of paper detailing tasks, things to do around the house, chore schedules, future goals, places to visit, websites to revisit, books to read, films to rent, errands to run, food shopping lists....etc.

Then I found this web application....

In one of my fits of internet browsing, I came across 37signals, an ingenious little company that makes ingenious little applications. I now have my own ta da list (which is a compilation of to do lists). I tried to share a list with both my brother (with whom I must collaborate on a number of house projects) and another one with a client. To my dismay, neither appear to have looked at the lists. Prior to finding Ta Da, I used "now do this", which is a very simple program that allows you to put in your tasks for the day and click the "done" button when you're done, until you uni-task your way through. However, after a couple of days I found that now-do-this was too simple. In fact, if you accidentally close your browser you lose your whole list and you're left thinking, now don't do that, stupid program. So, not functional enough.

I am waiting to see what the pick up is on the Ta Da to do lists before I introduce my client to Highrise or Basecamp. However, both of these web apps could be just what our small, minimally staffed, frequently travelling dance company needs.

Which brings us back to the issue of web usability. What does that mean, anyway? Well, from what I understand from 37signals and Jakob Nielsen (see his retro-looking site), it refers to web interfaces: web design, not graphic design.

Some interfaces work, some don't. We all know this intuitively. Like many semi-sophisticated web users, I do have some basic programming skills, I started a blog in 2000, I use dictionary.com, I get a lot of my news online, google is my best friend....I am loyal to good sites and don't both with bad ones.

From the point of view of the 'user', websites provide a service.
How well they provide that service is a question of their 'usability'.

A real time, enfolding as I write this, example of web usability:
My dear colleague Douglas, despite wearing two watches on his left wrist like a character in Alice in Wonderland, has somehow mistaken the departure time for his daughter's bus trip up to camp. This, he now claims, is the fault of the website. He could not find the departure time of the bus, and when he did find it, it was buried in many other numbers and dates so he mixed it up with some other time.

I just went to the website to find the relevant page and link it for our reference but...I couldn't find it. Disastrous!

Now, Camp Big Canoe is a very small organization that services a limited number of people. But any time you go to a website and get fed up that you can't find what you want, anytime a website drives you crazy by hiding the most important information behind layers of click, anytime they frustrate you as you try to: find a schedule; book a ticket; do a search; find a phone number; donate money; send an email-- they are crippling the functionality of the internet, wasting our time and their own money in the process.

I have gone to a website before, felt confused or irritated, and left right away. I no longer go to those websites (ie. nowdothis.com).

Anyhow, those issues are top of mind because since working for NetGain I have been responsible for generating content for one website and designing two others from scratch. Any sites you love lately or have been forced to use?

Digital not-for-profits can make more money...if they know how.

I was reading this article in the Globe and Mail. It recounts the history of a small canadian firm, TakingITGlobal which...does something involving youth and connecting them to changing the world. In the words of the founder "social networking for social change." Hmmm. Formally, "Our mission is to provide opportunities for learning, capacity-building, cross-cultural awareness and self-development through the use of Information and Communication Technologies."

I know very little about TakingITGlobal. The article is part of the G and M's "business incubator" series which examines and solicits solutions from consultants to problems faced by small businesses.

TIG, like almost all not-for-profits, would like to secure and increase their revenue streams and membership, as the majority of their funding is from government or foundation sources. I discussed the demands made on not-for-profits to secure grants this week in connection to the Wellesley Institute's report, We Can't Afford to do Business this Way.

The solutions offered to diversify revenue:

Typical not-for profit solutions:

• seek sponsorship (that hopefully won't conflict with your mandate and values). Sponsorship is often suggested as a way of underwriting not-for-profit enterprises but has great potential with TIG because of their global reach and sizeable membership. (this was mentioned)


• more government/foundation funding


• earned revenue (institutions: ancillary revenues i.e. gift shops and restaurants; cultural groups: merchandise; corporate fees; service providers: membership fees, product sales, other ancillary revenues)

Uniquely digital solutions:

• on-site advertising. I am surprised they don't have advertising on the site, as hasn't this been the major revenue stream for internet businesses? And, with an estimated 200,000 members, guaranteed clicks)


• create and collect fees for "premium" membership. But will people pay? My personal experience: I blanche at paying for content. Why pay when there is so much good content for free? I really despise when I am forced to watch a video ad before reading an article, but I will put up with it if it means not having to pay! One of the more brutal responses to the G&M article summed it up like this: "only think[sic] people pay for online is gambling, porn and ebay. how many people pay to read newspapers online?" But I know Nerve and Salon have gone this way.


• rebrand in order to attract new members (which would involve redoing parts of the site, I assume). I personally find the site has no point of entry for new users. I'm 26. Am I considered youth or not? Is the site for me or not? It's hard to tell. Confused at the point of entry, I do not waste time going further.


• also to attract new members: use other social networking sites, ie. Facebook. I found out about this wonderful micro-lending organization through Facebook. Funnily enough, my friend whose page it was on wasn't even a lender, but now I am.

The wonderful thing about these (ok, run of the mill) solutions is that they are applicable to any organization that is moving towards a primarily digital offering like....the Canadian Music Centre (with whom we met today!) They are in the process of putting a whole wack of digital music online...

Last comment on the article: I was suprised at the vitriole directed at the organization in the comments section. They can't see why the organization exists at all and generally see it as a charity that sucks money away from 'real' cash-stricken charities. I have found that that is a constant and legitimate question about not-for-profits whose primary role is to direct people or information or funds to/about other not-for-profits.

Variety Thursday: What's on the internet

Something I know very little about: 'Trolls' and 'trolling': Here. Kind of sad.

"The Olympic Games will be played out on Facebook, YouTube and Flickr whether we like it or not. We need to engage, not disengage, with them," said Balfour.
Very wise. Check out the story here.

"Cirque du Soleil was formed in 1984 by Laliberte and fellow street performers in Quebec. Since then, it has grown into a sprawling global operation that plans to put on 18 separate shows on four continents this year." Now investors from Dubai own 20%. I know someone who dances for CdS (she is an amazing breakdancer!). Check out that story here. Another one of our clients, Centennial College, has a program in Dubai. Dubai seems to me like a strange desert kingdom being assembled from scratch, all hubris and glory.

Two of my favorite "affordable" art sites: 20 x 200 and Lumas. My favorite Lumas photographer is Juho Kuva. These sites are also possibly worth your consideration as successful digital models for connecting art to consumers/audience. Aren't these iterations on iTunes/ youtube/ etc. ? Don't they lead me to artists I never knew existed? Now I know Juho Kuva's name and one day may possibly own some of his work.